Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 3 Feb 2022

Vol. 1017 No. 4

European Union Regulation: Motion

I move:

That Dáil Éireann approves the exercise by the State of the option or discretion under Protocol No. 21 on the position of the United Kingdom and Ireland in respect of the area of freedom, security and justice annexed to the Treaty on European Union and to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, to accept the following measure:

Regulation (EU) 2021/1147 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 July 2021 establishing the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund,

a copy of which was laid before Dáil Éireann on 31st January, 2022.

Today, I am seeking the approval of the House to proceed with the formal opt-in to the new round of the EU Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund, AMIF. Under the AMIF, the EU provides financial support for a comprehensive approach to the management of migration in the European Union. As Deputies will be aware, Ireland is required to formally opt in to certain EU home affairs instruments under arrangements in place for non-Schengen member states. This includes the new 2021-2027 AMIF programme.

The opt-in process requires both Government and Oireachtas approval. I obtained Government approval at the Government meeting last week and this motion is being moved in both Houses of the Oireachtas today. The Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund is an important means of supporting some of our most vulnerable migrant communities, including refugees and asylum seekers. It is exclusively targeted at non-EU nationals. The funding is used both by my Department and the Department of Justice to finance a wide range of asylum, migration and integration programmes.

The fund was adopted by EU member states in 2021. Its overall policy objective at the EU level is to contribute to the efficient management of migration flows and to the implementation, strengthening and development of the EU common policy on asylum and the common immigration policy. Within this overall objective, the fund is intended to contribute to the following specific objectives: strengthening and developing all aspects of the common European asylum system, including its external dimensions; strengthening and developing legal migration to the member states in accordance with their economic and social needs, and promoting and contributing to the effective integration and social inclusion of third-country nationals; contributing to countering irregular migration, enhancing effective, safe and dignified return and readmission, and promoting and contributing to effective initial reintegration in third countries; and enhancing solidarity and fair sharing of responsibility between the member states, in particular as regards those most affected by migration and asylum challenges, including through practical co-operation.

Under the framework of these objectives, each member state develops its own national programme setting out how it intends to use the fund at the national level in support of these objectives. Ireland opted into the previous Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund, which ran from 2014 to 2020, and to the two funds that preceded it, namely, the European Integration Fund and the European Refugee Fund. Ireland's likely allocation under the new fund will be determined when the opt-in process is completed. Under the previous AMIF, the State was allocated some €55.5 million across the areas of asylum, integration and return.

Since 2016, my Department and previously the Department of Justice and Equality have used AMIF funding to support NGO-led migrant integration programmes, aspects of the Irish refugee protection programme, IRPP, and the returns programme operated by the Department of Justice for international protection applicants whose claims have not been successful, or who choose to return to their home country.

The AMIF is distributed by my Department in a number of ways in order to help Ireland meet its objectives under an agreed national programme. Specifically, my Department administers open calls for proposals and provides grant funding to successful applicants, typically NGOs working in the area of migrant integration; provides direct awards to certain bodies that have unique ability to perform specific measures; and provides funds to assist the return of third-country nationals to their country of origin, on both a voluntary and involuntary basis, under a returns programme operated by the Department of Justice. Under the open call process, organisations can submit proposals for programmes and projects to address the asylum and integration objectives of the national programme.

The first open call process under the previous AMIF took place in 2016 and following an assessment process 20 projects nationwide were awarded grants totalling €4.5 million. A second open call process was run in 2019 where a further €4.5 million was distributed to 19 successful organisations. Subject to completion of the opt-in to the 2021-2027 AMIF programme, it is intended that my Department will run another open call for proposals later in 2022, once a national programme for the new fund has been developed.

The range of projects funded under AMIF is broad. For example, under the open calls process for AMIF 2014-2020, Gaisce was funded to provide an opportunity for young asylum seekers, refugees and third country nationals to achieve a Gaisce award by improving personal and physical skills and undertaking community involvement, team challenges and an "adventure journey". There are many benefits for this group in completing Gaisce awards, including improved confidence and well-being, and positive mental health and social inclusion, which are especially important given the difficult circumstances these young people may have encountered.

Another type of project funded under AMIF is run by Spirasi, which works to ensure that victims of torture receive the supports they need to support healing and recovery. They are offered educational and psychosocial supports to enable their integration into normal life after traumatic episodes of torture. These are just a small sample representative of the many worthwhile projects funded under the 2014-2020 programme.

Under the 2014-2020 programme, three direct awards totalling €3.9 million have been granted to the Irish refugee protection programme, which is operated by my Department to resettlement work. The funding has supported selection missions to Lebanon, transport for beneficiaries and the integration of beneficiaries here in Ireland. In 2019, the HSE received a direct award of €990,000 to fund the Safetynet project. This is a mobile health screening service which visits direct provision centres to provide medical screening to asylum seekers.

Under AMIF rules, my Department has also availed of a technical assistance budget of €2.56 million from Ireland's allocation. This supports the funds administration unit in my Department to effectively administer the AMIF funds in Ireland. Technical assistance will also be available under the new fund.

Each participating member state must produce a national programme setting out its objectives and plans for how the funding will be deployed.

National programmes are normally drafted following consultation with relevant interests in the State, including NGOs, as well as with the European Commission, which is responsible for overseeing the fund's administration. Subject to approval for the opt-in, my Department will lead the development of a national programme for Ireland for the next set of funding. This new national programme will cover the main areas of the fund, namely asylum; legal migration; integration; resettlement; countering irregular migration; returns; and solidarity measures.

In developing the new national programme, my Department will consult with stakeholders in the areas of asylum, migration and integration, including relevant NGOs and Departments, to include the Department of Justice, which will continue to manage funded activities in the areas of migration and return. Members will all be aware of the extensive work under way in my Department to implement the White Paper to end direct provision, which I published almost one year ago. This is a priority area for the Government as we seek to replace the direct provision system with a new model that is better able to support the independence, autonomy and right to family life of asylum seekers.

Respect for human rights, early integration, and partnership with the not-for-profit sector are essential principles of the new model we are now putting in place. Work is progressing well in my Department and across the Government to implement the policy changes set out in the White Paper. While there remains much preparatory work to be done, at our current rate of progress we anticipate that the first moves from direct provision centres into the new independent accommodation provided under the new model will commence later this year. In developing the new programme AMIF, we will ensure it provides opportunities for AMIF funding to support these reforms. Subject to Oireachtas approval of the opt-in, the relevant EU bodies will be informed and work on the national programme can begin. I commend the motion to the House and seek Members' support.

This is an important debate and we are glad to be engaged in it because the fund and the initiatives and policies for which it provides money are important and deserve debate.

I wish to raise a number of matters. The first relates to EU migration policy as a whole. We face a migration crisis brought by war, climate change and systematic discrimination, especially in Africa and the Middle East. The easiest thing to do - it is, unfortunately, the path some other EU member states and institutions wish to take - is to pull up the drawbridge and to treat this as not our problem and not to concern ourselves with it. The shredding of international law related to refugee and asylum matters that comprises much of EU policy was opposed by Sinn Féin through our representatives in the European Parliament, but these changes seem to be progressing nonetheless, to be implemented in a number of other ways.

One of the more notable examples is the EURODAC database, which records and stores the fingerprints of migrants for the EU in order to implement the Dublin protocol. Last year a proposal was brought which would see the minimum age for recording of fingerprints on the database brought down from 14 years of age to only six years of age. While this obscenity was done to prevent child trafficking, the implications of this amount of surveillance on minors cannot be ignored. A humane migration policy cannot be built on violating the human rights of those who are fleeing prosecution. Although EURODAC comes under the Department of Justice's purview, it is important to raise and discuss it when discussing EU funding for these matters because it crosses many Departments. The EU also has to grapple increasingly with the urgent need for further programmes of refugee acceptance, which we have seen with regard to Syria and, more recently, in Afghanistan. Those who worked in EU institutions and for America in Afghanistan cannot be left at the mercy of the situation there. While other rescue missions might be difficult, the State should look to accept as many as is practical to come into this country.

Turning to matters specifically under the Department's responsibility, the goal of integration is, of course, an important one, and the fund and the programme that encourages it should enjoy support. However, the material basis of society is what aids integration the most. Where people are pitted against one another for resources and where austerity often prevails, racism will find a more welcoming environment. Integration programmes will not work if housing or healthcare policy is not working. All of these things have to be doing their job. We in Sinn Féin have policies in those areas, which everyone is aware of.

Housing, in particular, will be key to ending direct provision, which, to the Minister's credit, he has made a priority. It is worth putting on record what the Government's White Paper has stated on the matter of accommodation as it was released last year. It states:

- Houses and/or apartments will be built and/or acquired through approved housing bodies or equivalent organisations. This option will be used for families and single people, particularly vulnerable single people.

- Buildings will be repurposed through urban renewal initiatives to create accommodation for single people.

- Rent a room schemes will be used to source some of the accommodation for single people.

- Private tenancies will be used to source accommodation for families as necessary.

It should be noted that the latter two of these four options explicitly rely on the private rental market. While we are all heartened by the stories of people accepting Syrian refugees into their homes, it is not a long-term policy solution, and rent-a-rooms comprise part of the private rental market, meaning they offer poor protection to tenants where there is inflation of prices. The last option is unambiguously focused on private rental, which echoes the Government's failed HAP policies, and recent responses to parliamentary questions do not fill me with confidence as they mention the acquisition of turn-key properties. In and of itself this is not an issue, but there are now multiple agencies bidding against one another and this has the potential to cause further inflation and to condemn refugees to possibly lower standards of end accommodation.

Sinn Féin was clear that the investment into approved housing bodies options was key, especially if purpose-built accommodation is to be constructed. My colleague, Deputy Ó Broin, in a recent paper about the true level of homelessness in this country, revealed that there were 1,640 people who had received leave to remain but were still living in direct provision. The reason for this is very simple: there is nowhere else for them to go due to the shortage of housing. Refugees are particularly vulnerable to discrimination within the private rental market, and I think the Minister is aware of that. Accommodation needs to be provided on a non-profit basis. That is really important. I call on the Minister to start publishing a pipeline report for accommodation to be provided under her Department. Of course, this fund will provide money for that. The report should say what accommodation is forthcoming and by what means it is to be built or acquired. This is incredibly important as it is the stated aim of the Government to essentially clear out the current system before new applicants are brought into the reform system. If we are to clear out the direct provision system now, obviously there will have to be space to put these people. That is the real issue. The inclusion of asylum seekers as part of the undocumented scheme, which I was surprised to see, when the Minister could have just provided leave to remain for these people instead, clearly seems to be part of that policy. Direct provision must be ended humanely. A fudge, where the private rental market would have to provide the accommodation for nearly 9,000 extra people, is simply not going to work and is not acceptable.

The Labour Party supports Ireland's opt-in to the 2021-2027 asylum, migration and integration fund. We take issue, however, with some of the on-the-ground reality within the European Union towards refugees. Statistics released by the Greek Government and confirmed by the UNHCR set the total number of arrivals to Greece in 2021 at 8,000, of which roughly half arrived by sea. The Greek ministry for maritime affairs, however, reports more than 29,000 rescues by the Hellenic Coast Guard in the same period, with just 25,000 people remaining unaccounted for. The reality of the EU's hostility towards migrants and asylum seekers was brought into sharp focus when Irish citizen, Seán Binder, was arrested and charged for crimes carrying up to a 25-year sentence for joining other activists and NGO workers in rescuing African migrants who had got into difficulty in the Aegean Sea. There is a clear issue within the European Union with pushbacks and with migration and integration in practice. Each one of these figures is a human life, yet there are ministers in European governments parroting that it is positive to have low migration flows into Europe. This is true only if refugees are not fleeing; it is an overwhelming negative if refugees are seeking asylum but numbers remain low or decrease. It means that Europe is an unwelcome place that does not believe that desperate people deserve refuge. Ireland is not an outlier in this regard and we must do far more before we can accuse others of not pulling their weight.

We in the Labour Party welcome the regularisation programme for undocumented people living in Ireland announced by the Minister, Deputy McEntee, this week. We also welcome the parallel programme being opened for people in Ireland's asylum system. Regarding the regularisation scheme, however, my colleague, Deputy Bacik, has been critical of the decision to discount time spent in the asylum system when calculating an applicant's time spent living in Ireland. Many people will find they are eligible for neither scheme as a result.

We in Labour see this as punishing people for being trapped in a system which this State has acknowledged is inefficient. While the scheme is welcome and is a tribute to the work of the Green Party in government, it could have been much more generous. Last year my colleague Deputy Duncan Smith questioned the Department of Justice regarding the status of refugees and asylum seekers in direct provision and raised the potential for an amnesty to give these applicants citizenship in order to alleviate many of the very serious issues they face and enable those people to find and obtain accommodation where they could live safely during this unprecedented pandemic. We cannot allow human beings to be treated as lesser people. We must completely overhaul our asylum system and we must grant a citizenship amnesty to all asylum seekers and refugees currently resident in Ireland. We must treat all people of Ireland with dignity and respect.

I support the programme announced by the Minister, Deputy McEntee, and any such move is definitely progress. Why could this program not be broadened to capture more people who are living and working in Ireland in circumstances of great uncertainty? Someone who is living here, working here, paying tax here and contributing to Irish society belongs here. They are one of us; they are us. The country of céad míle fáilte has a long way to go to live up to that ethos and it begins with conversations like this. When we see these positive moves, why do we need to ask why it is limited?

Every week I deal with people who are in these exact scenarios. They work in our communities and contribute to our society. Their kids play on our sports teams and are involved in local community groups. We are all richer for them. We must show basic reality and humanity and be sure we never tell somebody they do not belong.

I draw the Minister's attention to a piece published in the Dublin Inquirer this week from Shamim Malekmian. Her piece highlights the ongoing failure to provide long-promised immigration detention centres. In 2021 people who were refused entry to Ireland at our borders were forced to await deportation in prisons. There is sparse information on the numbers of people who are detained in prison for this reason because data are not collected in the absence of a dedicated immigration detention facility. Such a facility was to have been opened in 2020. It is inhumane to detain people in Garda stations and prisons.

Another EU directive, the return directive to which Ireland is not a signatory, requires that immigration detention must take place in a specialised facility and that all those detained should have access to legal experts and free legal aid. This is not currently in place. People detained include those seeking asylum. Seeking asylum is not a crime. It is a fundamental human right to be respected by states. Ireland should move immediately to correct this alarming situation.

The Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund is a mechanism to address issues relating to the lack of integration and diversity in sectors of Irish society. While we pride ourselves on being welcoming people, the reality can be very different for migrants and people of colour who experience anything from microaggression to racially motivated attacks. The recent incident of performers from "The Lion King" musical being subjected to racial abuse in Dublin is just one of many examples we could draw on. The State needs to direct its resources to ensure greater equality and integration. The Government still claims that 2024 is the target for ending direct provision, but the slow pace does not indicate to those trapped in the system that this will be achieved. We still have entire families in congregated settings often separated from the local communities, with integration being left to very dedicated local volunteers and the good faith of schools, doctors and community organisations.

When I raised this issue last July, the Minister assured me that families and children are being moved to independent living accommodation, which is most welcome. However, he neglected to mention that families may be moved considerable distances. In one case, a family was moved from Cork to Donegal, ignoring the children's integration in their schools or the support network the family had built up over years in the area. The International Protection Accommodation Service is trying to solve one problem while creating a whole new set of issues. Where is the consideration of the people involved? If integration is the goal, why is it not taken seriously in making these decisions?

Gender-based violence has rightly been a major focus recently. Migrant girls and women are disproportionately represented in statistics. They are particularly vulnerable due to different factors such as their migration status, ability to speak English and the type of work in which they are predominantly employed. Shortly before Christmas, representatives of the Migrants Rights Centre Ireland presented to the Joint Committee on Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth. They pointed out that migrant women continue to experience barriers in exiting situations of domestic violence and accessing support services. Women are fearful because their status is linked to a partner's entitlement to retain immigration status following a separation from a partner. While there have been some limited measures to address this, we need proper reform in this area.

These situations raise the question about how the immigration system makes migrants more vulnerable. For example, undocumented people often do not access services or report crimes for fear it will result in their deportation. The scheme to regularise undocumented people is an important development, but we need guarantees or a firewall approach that prevents information being passed from, for example, the Department of Social Protection to the Department of Health, or from the Department of Health to the immigration office.

Stable diverse communities are an essential pillar of integration. For the most part it happens naturally in neighbourhoods, schools and workplaces. For this to happen we need accessible and affordable housing. Migrants and minorities are over-represented in homelessness figures. We need a whole-of-government approach to integration to understand these interconnected issues. These are just some examples. Migrants, people of colour, Travellers and others experience discrimination in different ways every day. Some of these barriers are a matter of policy and need to be changed. Others relate to interventions around training and support, which can be paid for by the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund.

However, the fund is also used for return management and countering irregular migration. Many Irish people are deeply uncomfortable with the reality behind these phrases. Migrants drowning in the Mediterranean and deaths in south-east Europe, especially in winter, such as the case of 12 migrants who froze to death near Turkey's border with Greece this week, represent a failure to understand and respond adequately to the situation. These aspects of the fund are very concerning and need greater scrutiny.

We need to push for the progressive use of the fund, not putting the lives of migrants at risk. The previous Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund was used to support organisations working in the area, including, Nasc, the Migrant Rights Centre Ireland, and in Cork city Gaisce and Cork ETB. There was also investment in schemes providing employment readiness training and diversity training in schools. We need to use the current fund to further this type of work and to foster the type of Ireland the vast majority of Irish people want.

The next five-minute slot is for People Before Profit, as láthair. The Regional Group and the Rural Independent Group are also as láthair. I call Deputy Pringle from the Independent Group, who has five minutes.

I wish to share time with Deputy Connolly.

May we have the time from all the other groups?

No, I am afraid the time slots are pre-arranged. Deputy Connolly might have done that if she was sitting here as Leas-Cheann Comhairle.

As we know, this motion on the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund is coming up for adoption today. It is interesting to read the regulations from the EU governing this fund. As I read the document, I wondered what the real intention of it was. It seems clear to me that it is to stop immigration to the EU from war-torn and economically fragile African and Middle Eastern countries. Paragraph 9 states that given that certain actions taken outside the Union contribute to the achievement of the fund's objectives under certain circumstances it may bring the Union added value, which means stopping people getting here so we will not have to deal with them.

The fund should support the strengthening of partnerships with third countries for the purpose of managing migration. We can take this as meaning countries such as Libya which are totally dysfunctional thanks to military action taken by France and the UK on behalf of oil companies in our name in years gone by. The EU is happy for migrants to be pushed back to countries where there is no functioning government and placed in camps and prisons with untold danger for them simply because they wanted a better life for themselves and their families.

The regulation also states that the best interests of the child should be the primary consideration in all actions or decisions concerning children in migration. I ask the Minister in his summing up to explain how that will be achieved by this regulation. What role will countries like Libya play in partnership with us in ensuring that the best interests of the child are taken care of? It is sickening to say "in partnership with us" about the dysfunctional Libyan Government, but it is now one of our partners because of this document and the implications of this work.

I could go on to say more about this policy, but time is of the essence. I know this is about the adoption of specific regulations here in Ireland, but it is part of the overall European document which we obviously had a role in drafting.

These are important issues that affect how the process for asylum seekers will be implemented in Ireland and that needs to be addressed too.

I will reluctantly support the motion. The fund is very positive, although I have the greatest reservations about the regulation on which it is based and, like my colleague, about the theory behind it. It seems to be the building-up of a fortress Europe while giving a little money this way to calm the masses and dissent. In that context, I will support it.

I have a number of questions about the fund. This is our third time getting it. How was the money broken down on the previous occasion? I have some concern also about the money being used for the return of people to other countries. I would love to see the breakdown of that if one exists. I could not see it but that might be my fault.

The undocumented scheme is very positive. It was developed as a result of organisations on the ground pointing out the necessity for it. The Minister acted on that, and I am delighted. Nevertheless, there seem to be two parallel processes in being. Those under the undocumented scheme will get a stamp 4 visa after having been here for two years, and there is also the group of asylum seekers. Those under the undocumented scheme can come forward and apply, whereas for asylum seekers, it rests with the Department of Justice to come forward and tell people who are resident in the various institutions. There are two such places in Galway. The power, therefore, does not rest with those seeking benefit under this. The Minister might clarify that, as well as whether the six-month supply exists for asylum seekers living in those institutions.

The Minister might clarify also the contradiction in the Catherine Day report. Those under the asylum seeker process must wait for the Department of Justice to come forward, at which point they can get their stamp 4 visa for two years. The report of the Catherine Day advisory group called for a once-off simplified case-processing approach applying to all applicants who have been in the system for two years or more. It recommended they get five years. There are so many different recommendations and systems that run parallel here that it is utterly confusing. We put great store in the Catherine Day report, and the only difficulty I had related to the proposal for housing, as Deputy Martin Kenny outlined, and the reliance on the private market, which was always going to be a disaster. Other than that, Catherine Day and the report have got unanimous support and praise.

The case-processing approach was one of the strong recommendations in the report, and there was also a recommendation to address the practical problems such as the cost of applying and so on. In addition, other groups have been excluded from the scheme. I do not expect one scheme to sort out all the problems, but it is important that the Department would conduct an analysis of those affected by exclusion. We are looking after one group, of approximately 17,000, including 3,000 children, but we are excluding other groups, such as people who have lost their status under non-EU rules. Such persons, if they are married to someone in the EU, are no longer able to get what they used to. Different groups are always excluded and there is an onus on the Department to analyse that. When there is one positive outcome, the Department must ask what the problems with that are. I will stop there because I am out of time.

I thank all the Deputies for their contributions. To respond to Deputy Connolly on the breakdown, under the 2014-2020 scheme, Ireland had €55.5 million allocated. I have to hand a copy of the percentages for each of the areas. A total of 30% of the national allocation was spent on asylum, 32% on integration, 22% on return, 5.8% on solidarity and 10% on technical assistance. Under the regulations, that was the requirement for Ireland. Many of the groups she and other Deputies spoke about received their funding allocation coming from those. In my opening remarks, I highlighted a couple of the really good projects that have been financed over the past six years.

Many Deputies spoke with accuracy in regard to the issues with large-scale EU migration and the EU's approach to migration. It is important to recognise what Ireland has done as a country over recent years and particularly during the Covid pandemic to recognise the crises that exist in regard to our ongoing support for Syrian refugees coming to this country through the IRPP. Just over 550 Syrian refugees came to Ireland in 2021. I had the privilege, and the difficult task, of visiting a Syrian refugee camp in November of last year and saw the conditions in which Syrians have been living there for almost a decade following the civil war. I met Syrians who will be moving to Ireland and starting a new life here and spoke to members of the Jordanian Government, which has done a great deal to offer support. Approximately 20% of the Jordanian population now comprises Syrian refugees, and they are given the same level of social supports and of access to Covid vaccines. I was very impressed with Jordan's support for and solidarity with its neighbours.

We also acted swiftly in the context of Afghanistan. A total of 550 emergency visas have been offered to Afghan citizens. More than 400 Afghans have already come to this country and, again, many throughout the country are being supported through the community sponsorship programme. We fulfilled our commitment towards unaccompanied minors, 28 of whom we received from Lesbos in the latter part of last year.

Deputy Martin Kenny spoke about the White Paper and our moves to discuss accommodation. As Deputy Connolly highlighted, the Catherine Day report is a fantastic document, but it recommended going down the HAP route. It indicated HAP should be the majority way in which provision for asylum seekers, while they await that determination, is met. We disagreed with that, which is why, in the White Paper, HAP is not the central focus. Rather, the central focus relates to build and purchase. That is what we are committed to doing and it is what we are working on, but we have to recognise we are creating a long-term system that will have ebbs and flows, and we have to build flexibility into it. At some point, some of that flexibility may involve HAP or other methods, but the central part of what we are doing relates to build and buy, in a way that does not conflict with the activities of local authorities. That is why we have worked closely with the Housing Agency and some of those larger bodies, particularly for single accommodation. We are not competing with families for the likes of a three-bed semi-detached house, given we are looking for something different, at least in some cases.

I welcome the support for the regularisation scheme, a very important scheme. I disagree with what was said about it being restrictive. It is a very broad approach. Other than a recognition that people have to have been living in the country for a period, namely, three years if they have children or four if they do not, it is a very broad approach for dealing with undocumented people and it is designed to bring people out of the shadows and into being registered and regularised in order that they can fully enjoy all the rights and protections everyone else does.

I welcome also the provision for people in international protection and direct provision at the moment. The Department of Justice will notify those who have been in the international protection application process for more than two years as to whether they are eligible for the scheme. A period of two years is the cut-off point of eligibility for the scheme. Obviously, it is then up to the individual. He or she can decide to apply for the regularisation scheme or, of course, continue on his or her existing international protection application. We are making that as flexible as possible, recognising that people have a right to apply for international protection. No one will be forced to apply under the regularisation scheme but it is an option for them. Particularly in the case of people who have been in the system for a long period, perhaps having gone through judicial reviews and the like or having lived in limbo for many years, this offers an opportunity to allow them to establish a status for themselves.

I welcome the House's support for the motion.

Question put and agreed to.
Top
Share