I thank the Chair. I apologise that I have to take parliamentary questions in the House later. I would have moved or changed them otherwise.
I am pleased to be here today to discuss the proposal that the State exercises its option to participate in the EU asylum and migration pact and I thank the committee for its engagement on this matter. As the committee will be aware, following intensive negotiations over almost eight years, political agreement at European level was reached in December 2023 on the remaining measures of the pact.
The Government, on my recommendation, then approved, at Cabinet, opting-in to all of the non-Schengen measures on 27 March. The European Parliament subsequently approved all elements of the pact on 10 April and they are expected to be formally adopted by the Council of the EU in the coming weeks. Ireland was involved throughout the negotiations on these measures and the Government fully supports the outcome which we believe produces a fair, sustainable and efficient asylum procedure in full compliance with fundamental rights.
The pact will enhance the common European asylum system, of which we are already a member. It aims to make it a stronger, more cohesive and comprehensive solution to the challenges presented by migration. Its strength lies in its holistic, rather than selective, approach. It brings together policy in the areas of migration, asylum, integration and border management recognising that the overall effectiveness depends on progress on all fronts. This common response also reflects the EU’s partnerships with third countries to address the root causes of irregular migration, combat migrant smuggling and support an effective returns policy and well-managed legal migration.
Let me give a brief overview of the pact measures I am proposing that we opt into, as well as some related measures that we will not opt into as they are Schengen measures and, therefore, we cannot. First, the screening regulation will apply where people first enter the EU irregularly, or are identified on the territory of a member state without permission. They will be required to undergo a screening procedure within seven days at most. This will consist of identification or verification of identity, health and vulnerability checks, security checks, fingerprints and registration in the Eurodac database. At the end of the screening, all people concerned will be directed to the relevant procedure, whether that is asylum or return. If people then move on to another member state, that member state will have access to the relevant identity and security information. This is a Schengen measure but Ireland will align with these provisions in national law insofar as is possible. Essentially we will replicate what we cannot join.
The Eurodac regulation will be very important for Ireland as a country that experiences high levels of secondary movement. Eurodac is an EU IT system that allows us to check whether someone has lodged an application for asylum in another EU country.
The new regulation will extend the system to collect more information for wider immigration purposes and enhance the sharing of information between EU countries on irregular arrivals. This will include collection of a facial image as well as fingerprints and we are reducing the age for taking of fingerprints to six years and over. This is to provide better protection for at-risk children. Accessing information on which member state is responsible helps in returning secondary movers to the correct member state. Importantly, we will have access to security information, where it is applicable, from the screening checks in other member states.
The asylum procedures regulation provides for faster, fairer processing of asylum applications across the EU. It includes border procedures, which are very condensed procedures, for certain applicants such as those without documentation or those who come from countries with low recognition rates for asylum. It also provides for accelerated and inadmissibility decisions to be taken in three and two months, respectively. The longest time frame for a first instance decision is six months for the ordinary procedure. We are already making changes to try to ensure we have faster processing. Approximately 70% to 80% of applicants will be processed in less than three months with the remainder processed within the six-month period. This will mean that people spend less time in state-provided accommodation and, ultimately, are more likely to be returned to their country of origin. Appeals, of course, are provided for, as well as safeguards in the form of vulnerability checks, legal assistance and interpretation. There are greater safeguards for minors. In short, this regulation will ensure people get a quicker decision, whether positive or negative, on their claim. If it is a positive decision, they can move on with their lives quickly. If it is a negative decision, they can be removed more quickly.
The asylum qualification regulation provides for some small refinements to the criteria for applicants to qualify for asylum and subsidiary protection and the rights of persons who benefit from these statuses. Some new features include options to review the granting of subsidiary protection where the situation in the country of origin improves and the mandatory recording of applicant interviews. Harmonisation of the rules on qualification reduces the incentive for applicants to move from one member state to another, which is positive for Ireland.
The return border procedure regulation is a Schengen measure that Ireland is not part of. However, it is proposed to provide for similar provisions in national law insofar as is possible in line with the comprehensive approach being taken to this package of measures. This proposal is aimed at increasing the effectiveness of returns. It requires member states to effect the return of those who were refused status under the border procedure within a prescribed time of 12 weeks. Persons undergoing the return border procedure are requested to reside in designated locations. These locations do not have to be close to a border. Applicants subject to the return border procedure must be granted a period of up to 15 days for voluntary return if they so require it. Under the procedure, detention may only be used as a measure of last resort on the basis of an individual assessment and if other less coercive measures cannot be applied effectively. Managing external borders and the return of persons who no longer have a right to stay in the EU is an integral part of a functioning migration system and must be done with full respect for human rights. Reflecting this regulation in our national law will lead to a more efficient asylum process, where applicants will spend less time awaiting a decision in reception facilities.
The asylum and migration management regulation, AMMR, is aimed at dealing with the imbalance between responsibility and solidarity across the Union on migration and reducing secondary movement, where a person moves from the country in which they first arrived to seek asylum in another.
This type of movement accounts for a significant proportion of applications in Ireland at any given time. This will be done by replacing the current system for determining which member state is responsible for an asylum application, which is known as the Dublin III regulation.
The AMMR, like Dublin III, establishes that the first member state where an international protection application is lodged has the responsibility to handle the claim. Ireland currently takes part in the Dublin III returns process, where take-back requests are made and relocations are agreed and implemented on a somewhat inefficient basis. The AMMR makes the transfer process clear and introduces timelines for the issuing of transfer notifications. It will also replace the current take-back request with a simpler take-back notification that will reduce the administrative burden of the current system and make it more effective. Ireland will directly benefit from a more efficient system and process that will allow us to identify and return secondary movers to the correct member state responsible, thereby freeing up our own system to assist those seeking international protection swiftly and efficiently.
To balance this responsibility, which will largely fall to so-called front-line member states such as Italy, Greece and Cyprus, the AMMR also introduces a mandatory solidarity mechanism to assist member states that are under migratory pressure or are at risk of coming under migratory pressure. It is important that member states can support one another when there is a time of significant pressure. Of course, Ireland may benefit from this provision too. A solidarity pool will be established under the regulation from which affected member states can draw. All member states will contribute on a fair-share basis. Ireland’s fair share of the solidarity pool would be 2.16% and, based on current figures, would translate to 648 relocations per annum or €12,960,000 by way of a financial contribution, if that was what we chose to do. Member states retain flexibility on how they meet this obligation. Let me be very clear in saying this does not mean Ireland will be responsible for an additional 648 international protection applications a year, or, indeed, for an additional 30,000 applications, which is the overall figure for Europe and not for Ireland. We will have the capacity to decide how we want to contribute based on our own capacity at the time. This may take the form of relocations, a financial contribution, offsetting against cases not being returned under take-back processes, or a combination of these. I also wish to point out that were Ireland to come under migratory pressure, we too would have access to the solidarity mechanism.
The reception conditions directive aims to provide a greater degree of harmonisation and uniformity in reception conditions across member states, an area which deals with matters such as accommodation, means of subsistence, access to the labour market and detention. Crucially, reception conditions must only be provided in the member states responsible for an application. Again, the aim here is to prevent secondary movement and to encourage people to return to the first country they entered. This will be of particular importance in the Irish context as we experience such high levels of secondary movement.
The directive will make changes regarding the legal framework regulating both freedom of movement and detention during the asylum procedure. However, the position remains that a person may not be subject to detention simply because they are an applicant. This must only be used as a last resort. There is no provision in the pact requesting or forcing member states to detain protection applicants. Harmonising the rules on reception conditions will reduce incentives for asylum seekers to move from one member state to another, which is again important for Ireland.
The crisis and force majeure regulation, CFMR, provides for specific rules that can be applied in cases of migratory crisis and force majeure, which are defined in the regulation. Under this regulation in the pact, the affected member state can employ certain measures to respond to the increase in applications as a result of the crisis it finds itself in. These may include longer registration deadlines to register applications for international protection, flexibility in applying the border procedure and the extension of timeframes in determining the member states responsible in the case of mass influx. All measures taken under the regulation need to meet requirements concerning necessity and proportionality in achieving objectives and protecting the rights of the applicants. Because the regulation deals with exceptional situations, all measures taken under it are taken on a temporary basis and cannot last for more than three months. Furthermore, no member state can activate this regulation on a unilateral basis, which is an important safeguard. Should Ireland find itself in a crisis situation, we will have the option to apply to the Commission to activate the procedure set out in this regulation.
Finally, I will briefly mention the resettlement regulation, which will be under the aegis of the Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth if we opt in. This regulation establishes a Union resettlement framework for the yearly resettlement of a certain number of third-country nationals to the member states. It provides common rules on admission of third-country nationals for resettlement and humanitarian admission, including rules on eligibility criteria and exclusion grounds, the status to be given to resettled persons and the decision-making procedure. While member states are required to pledge the number of persons they will resettle each year, it is possible to make a pledge of zero. This is something we already do. We have the Afghan and Syrian programmes, and we decide how many people we wish to opt into, or pledge, to take. It will not really have changed things too much.
I hope I have outlined the main benefits of opting-in to the comprehensive suite of pact measures. While it is important, though, to talk through the upside of opting-in, I also believe the risks of not opting-in are significant. We simply must recognise that the challenges presented by migration and asylum exist. They cannot be wished away. They must be addressed and they cannot be addressed in a globalised and interdependent world by any state acting alone. What is likely to happen if we do not opt in? Well, continuing to operate under existing systems would likely result in Ireland becoming a more attractive destination for individuals seeking protection. Numbers would almost certainly increase and yet we would be precluded from accessing solidarity and burden-sharing mechanisms. Our capacity to send people back to where they came from would also be severely limited, and this would mean more people in the reception system for longer periods. I do not think, then, it is realistic to present this as an issue which would simply evaporate if we chose not to engage or not to opt in. We also need to move in this regard without further delay. For Ireland to effectively align its laws and systems with other member states by 2026, a decision on opting in must be taken now. This is why I am proposing this timeline. Such a decision would not just send a clear signal to fellow member states and the Commission that we are committed to working in harmony and solidarity with them on migration but, more importantly, it would ensure Ireland can avail of the necessary support to implement the changes required to comply with the pact. This will include a substantial EU implementation budget to be distributed by the Commission. Looking at this year's budget alone, €34 million has been allocated to increase the number of staff and teams and the processing is already under way. We would have access to a significant amount of money in the context of this budget. If these proposals are approved, it is intended to establish an interdepartmental project board to develop and progress an implementation plan for the asylum and migration pact, with the support of the Commission, to ensure transposition of the measures by mid-2026. This is a major area of reform. As committee members know, two years is not a long time in which to try to implement legislation of this scale and volume. Time is therefore of the essence here.
I hope committee members will appreciate the benefits of opting into the pact on asylum and migration. I trust the briefing document supplied to the committee has been of assistance, and I will, of course, be happy to answer any questions members may have on any of the issues I have already referred to.
