I welcome the delegation and reiterate what Deputy Carey said. Those of us who work in this area are familiar with the work of the organisations represented here. These organisations did excellent work during 20 years when it was not the most popular thing to do. They identified with the vulnerable and the disadvantaged and I compliment the delegation on this. The commission's vibrancy and strength is a testimony to its efforts and the efforts of the current members' predecessors, many of whom I worked with through the years as an emigrant.
The delegation is correct on the point made in its submission about the profile of the 18,500 people who have emigrated. As Deputy Carey said, from a recent visit to the US it is clear that the greatest problems facing emigrant centres in that jurisdiction are social problems and the social baggage these people bring with them. These people's status is also undocumented. The social problems to which I refer include drug problems, separated families and personal relationships that have failed. These individuals are at their most vulnerable.
Would the delegation agree that the unit dealing with emigrants abroad, established as a direct result of the recommendations of the task force on emigrants, could take a more proactive role in the funding of, for example, the emigrant advice agency?
In respect of the Irish Episcopal Commission for Emigrants, perhaps there should be a more proactive approach, based on partnership, in light of the new trend that has manifested itself over the last few years. Should more resources be spent on advice and outreach workers? Despite the financing by the Department of Foreign Affairs, through the unit dealing with emigrants abroad, of those two organisations, I get the impression that it is making a minimal impact. I say that as an observation rather than a criticism.
This may be a matter of resources as much as anything else. I know the people working at the coalface in these organisation and they are all very committed. Does the delegation have a comment on this matter? The matter of undocumented emigrants in the US is allied to this, although it is somewhat separate. Many of those travelling to the US illegally could enter legally if they received the proper advice. Despite the restrictive nature of entry to the US since 11 September 2001, there are various means to do so legally. Perhaps many of the people concerned do not want to reach out because they left as a knee-jerk reaction to a domestic dispute but this is a real problem. Ultimately, as the delegation pointed out, some ended up in the prison system.
The delegation touched on violations which I presume was meant in a worldwide context, not just that of the United States. I am familiar only with what happens in the United States. This committee and the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs have taken up some high profile cases in the past 12 months which we have discussed with the US ambassador. As one high ranking US official stated to us last week: "We are on a war footing". That is the security environment in which the United States operates. When one hears such language from high ranking US officials in the context of immigrants whom they now view as posing a terrorist threat, the fact that they will automatically spend six weeks in the US prison system as criminals before being deported is a real cause for concern.
I am not sure what the answer is but my earlier question was related specifically to advice given here at home and whether there should be a greater proactive involvement. In the context of discrimination against the Irish in the United Kingdom, I spent seven years in London prior to and at the beginning of the IRA bombing campaign. Life was extremely difficult in Britain for the Irish who had to keep their heads down because all Irish people were identified as IRA supporters. However, I did not experience great discrimination, apart from the usual banter between English and Irish people. Does the delegation agree there is a need for education as much of this is based on ignorance and prejudice?
Senator Finucane touched on the unique closeness of the relationship between Britain and Ireland. Legally, the United Kingdom does not view Ireland as a foreign country for a wide variety of activities, the most popular of which is travel between Britain and Ireland, which transcends the Schengen agreement. Although it is not put as starkly in our legislation, there is a reciprocal arrangement. Does the anti-discrimination legislation in the United Kingdom fall within this? Where there is evidence of discrimination against Irish prisoners because of their ethnic background, can the prison officials concerned or their managers be taken to court and face the full rigours of the law? The delegation is probably aware of the most recent high profile case in the United Kingdom of an ambulance employee who took a case because she was harassed by her employers and workmates simply because she was Irish. She was brave and courageous to see the case through and won.
Rather than shouting at the system and cursing in the dark, does the delegation have any views on whether its own organisations, with the help of the Department of Foreign Affairs, could take up such cases of discrimination against Irish prisoners in UK jails and stamp it out once and for all? Such discrimination is unacceptable in this day and age, considering the strong and friendly relationship at State level between Britain and Ireland. I am amazed that those released on a life licence may never return to live in Ireland again. My opinion is that all of recommendations made under the various headings could be adopted by the committee, passed on and actively pursued and supported by it through the Department of Foreign Affairs.