Seanad Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 4 May 1988

Vol. 119 No. 8

Irish Emigrants in the US: Motion.

Mr. Connor

I move:

That Seanad Éireann condemns the ineffective and uncaring approach adopted by the Government in resolving the plight of the Irish (out of status) emigrants in the US, especially in view of repeated and unambiguous assurances given by the present Government when in Opposition and requests that the Government uses all in its resources to:

1. obtain support in the US Houses of Congress for legislative initiatives to change their status;

2. establish as a matter of urgency support and advice centres in New York, Boston, Chicago, Philadelphia and San Francisco;

3. supply support for Irish emigrants in the United States similar to that supplied by the Department of Labour to Irish emigrants in the United Kingdom.

My party are moving this motion in the House this evening because the crisis for the undocumented, out of status young Irish emigrants in the United States looms larger by the day. Over the past nine months much hope has been raised regarding the easement of the very precarious situation of the young Irish in America by the legislative initiatives in the US Houses of Congress. The US Immigration Bill, 1987, popularly known as the Kennedy-Donnelly Bill, was introduced in the American Senate in the latter half of 1987. Basically the intent of this Bill is to correct the discrimination and imbalances which arise out of the US Immigration Act, 1965. We should say in passing that the 1965 Immigration Act — its main author was a well-known Irish-American politician, Robert Kennedy as Attorney General — set out to change what was seen as a bias in the US immigration law and the Act really did change the principles of immigration into the United States. Prior to this, the law discriminated in favour of the older European countries who provided most of the white settlers on the North American Continent in the 18th and the 19th centuries. The 1965 Act abolished this and abolished the principle of national origins, and gave a bias towards people from the eastern hemisphere. It reversed the trend away from the countries from which the great masses and waves of emigration had originally come.

Since literally millions of Irish people settled in the United States in the 200 years of main settlement, this country was well favoured by the earlier legislation governing immigration in to the United States, that is, the Acts of 1924 and of 1952. However, in 1965 the principles upon which American immigration was based were changed and an immigration ceiling of 290,000 persons was fixed per annum to enter the United States — 120,000 immigrants from the western hemisphere and 170,000 from the East or from the oriental world.

However, the new rules hardly affected Ireland at all since this was the era of economic change in this country. It was the first time in well over a century that the flow of emigration was stemmed. The number of people wishing to leave and live in the United States fell off to a trickle. We were not using the quota we could have legally taken up under the new 1965 Act. That was the case for several years after that. However, the economic downturn which commenced in the late seventies changed all that. In addition, there was the radically altered demographic profile in the country. For the first time in generations a greater proportion of the population was in the age group 15 to 35 years. This was the result of a growing population and the relative prosperity of the sixties and most of the early seventies on this island.

By the early eighties well over half the population was under 25 years of age. They were the very numerous generation, the product of the baby boom of the early sixties. They were all well-educated and trained because of radical changes in our education policy in the sixties and seventies which ensured that we spent a very high proportion of our national income on education particularly beyond primary level, with all the various trainings in the new technologies, etc. In that period, incidentally, we were spending a greater proportion of our GDP than any other country in Europe on education. This was right and proper and, above all, it was highly enlightened. Alas there the enlightenment ended, because little was done to ensure that the Irish economy would be developed in such a way that it would provide jobs, careers and a satisfying lifestyle for most of the young people here at home.

Many experts, including politicians, pointed from the mid-seventies at the enormous problems we would face in providing sufficient work and job opportunities for the children of the boom of the early sixties who would be young adults in the early eighties. Towards the end of the seventies an economic madness was embarked upon in this country that has no parallel outside of the disaster of Mao Tse-tung's great leap forward. At the very time in our economic development when we should have been making special provision for the future of these young people by prudent investment and spending policies, we embarked instead on a wild orgy of overspending, irresponsible borrowing and the casting out of all the usual norms of economic management. All this quickly gave us the highest inflation rate among our competitors and the most adverse national debt outside the worst examples in Latin America, and an investment in everything except the productive area.

Very rapidly we had mass factory closures, job shedding in successful industries and no job opportunities for the tens of thousands of new entrants onto the job market. Then in the great Irish tradition, tens of thousands of our young people, particularly from 1982 onwards, took the boat and the plane to the United States and many of them went to the United Kingdom thus re-introducing the phenomenon of mass emigration. In the United States, except for a small elite handful, the vast majority were illegal or out of status, because of the terms and complexities of American immigration law.

The 1965 Act gave emphasis and priority to family reunification. If you were the son or daughter of an Irish emigrant who had become an American citizen you had ready and easy access to the United States. Similarly, the brother or the sister of an established citizen in the US had ready and easy access. This category had preference in getting citizenship or a work permit to go and live in the United States. That was the family reunification preference. All this would have worked well for the Irish had there not been a stem in the flow of emigrants to the United States in the mid-sixties. That stem in the flow effectively meant that there was a whole generation when hardly any Irish had moved to the US, unlike the previous 100 years when there was a constant flow. There were very few citizens in the US who were born in Ireland, had emigrated and had become US citizens and who could then claim their brothers or sisters, or their sons, daughters, or other close relatives. In the decade before the reform, that is 1955-65, approximately 50,000 Irish people entered and settled in the US legally but in the decade following the 1965 Act, that is 1965-75, only about 10,000 people moved from Ireland and settled legally in the US. Sadly, it is now estimated that there are at least 150,000 young Irish who have gone there since 1982, who are undocumented or illegal, and their position was never more threatened or more precarious than it is now.

Recently, the National Conference of Catholic Bishops in the United States, based in Washington, issued the results of a survey which was carried out on a broad representative sample of young Irish emigrants found in most of the major industrial cities in the US. The survey shows that about 70 per cent of them left Ireland because there were no jobs available for them here, and the remaining 30 per cent left because of a feeling of frustration with the economy and with the standard of living in Ireland.

Why has the optimism which was so prevalent up to two months ago about the prospect for the typical Irish non-documented emigrant started to wane so rapidly? The main reason is, I suppose, that the Immigration Bill, 1987, which passed so well in the Senate by a majority of 95 votes to five, has now started to languish and to falter in the House of Representatives. Many observers feel, and I am quite sure rightly, that this Bill has no chance of passage before the presidential and general election in the US in November. If it has not been passed by then, the legislation dies. The success in the Senate will be put at nil since, if a similar Bill is to be re-introduced in the next Congress, the same painstaking process will have to start over again in the Senate and it may not be successful the next time around. There is the added difficulty that this kind of legislation has to be discussed by a House of Representatives Judiciary Committee chaired by a liberal friend of this kind of legislation, Congressman Rudino. Congressman Rudino will be retiring from active politics and from the House in November, and his successor may not be so friendly towards this kind of legislation.

Let us be mindful at this stage, of course, that the Kennedy-Donnelly Bill will have a very small impact in easing the situation of the tens of thousands of immigrants who have been living illegally in the States since the last amnesty. The last amnesty, incidentally, was the result of the 1986 Immigration and Reform and Control Bill and it gave amnesty to all illegal immigrants who had settled in the United States before 1982. The 1987 Bill, now in the House of Representatives, provides for the creation of 50,000 additional visas for people wishing to enter the US from the older sources of emigration, that is, countries like Ireland, Italy, France, Germany etc. It is estimated that we would qualify for approximately 10,000 of these visas in each year, if we were lucky. Of course, these visas would apply only to young people at present here in Ireland and who wish to leave for the United States, or so it seems.

Minister of State at the Department of Education (Mr. F. Fahey)

Not true.

Mr. Connor

Much has been said about the great benefit this will be to the young people already in the US, undocumented or illegal. It is claimed that they can return to Ireland and make an application for one of these visas and they will be considered in conjunction with all the other applicants who have not already left this country. There is considerable doubt about this.

I would remind the Minister that one's passport is stamped when leaving the country. It is stamped when one is entering the United States and it is also stamped when one is leaving the country again. All of the people we are talking about will be found to have overstayed the limits of their visa as issued. This constitutes an immigration offence under US law. It is very doubtful that these people would be considered for any of those new visas because they may be considered as having committed an offence under US immigration law. The Minister might take that point on board. From that point of view, it is absolutely useless to the young people——

Mr. McKenna

It is all supposition.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

The Senator should be allowed continue without interruption.

Mr. Connor

——who are already there. On top of that there is the problem created for young people in America by the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act. The effect of this law is very effectively to close one of the last avenues of illegal entry into the United States since it requires employers to hire only citizens of the United States, or aliens who are authorised to work in the USA, i.e., those holding the Green Card. The employer is bound by this law to verify the legal employment status of all his employees. He must keep a full record of them and this record must be available at all times for presentation and examination by officials of the United States Immigration and Naturalisation Service. If an employer is found in breach of this law, he can be fined up to 10,000 dollars for each unlawful employee. The unfortunate immigrant who, of necessity, may be forced to make an untrue statement, or use improper documents in order to gain employment, could be imprisoned for up to five years or heavily fined, and of course, he would face deportation. This Act comes into the full force of law on 1 June next. One can easily imagine the apprehension and fear that will lead to for so many young people. If something is not done to create an amnesty for these 150,000 people whom the legislation under debate can hardly help because of the relatively few it can reach to start with, many immigrants will be fearful to make an application for these visas because it might reveal their overstay and all that might entail for them.

The 1986 Reform and Control Act had in it an amnesty principle, but provision was made, as we have said before, for people who had entered the US illegally prior to January 1982. A Select Commission on Immigration and Refugee Policy was established in the United States in 1981. They reported two years later and, as a result of their report, the 1986 Bill was introduced. The Commission on Immigration and Refugee Policy estimated that in 1982, there were 3.5 million illegal immigrants living in the United States.

The time allowed for people to apply for the amnesty extended from the date of the passage of the Bill in 1986 to 4 May 1988, today. It now seems that fewer than half of the people who are eligible for this amnesty have applied since it looks as if approximately only 1.5 million illegal aliens have sought the amnesty. It is a good two million persons short of the expected number. Of course, since most of the out of status emigrants in the US arrived after 1982, this amnesty has no beneficial effect on their situation. The great shortfall in the number who might have applied for the amnesty — as we have pointed out two million short of the expected figure, or at least the eligible figure according to the report of the commission — has greatly diminished the problem for the US immigration authorities. We should now immediately be pleading with the United States legislators, and I mean we should be pleading at every level, particularly at the level of Government to Government, for an extension of this amnesty. We should ask, if at all possible, that it be extended to 1986. This would in a single act solve the problem for thousands perhaps, in excess of 100,000 young Irish immigrants now living in limbo land, with no security in the United States. When we call for an extension we should not be calling for an extension for the Irish alone, but for all the other nationalities who were living in the US since 1982. There is no doubt that the Irish would have a greater proportion of benefit from such an extension than any other ethnic group.

I am a member of a back-bench committee of my own party which is studying the effects and problems of emigration. It is chaired by the former Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Barry. Our committee has lobbied and called for an extension of this amnesty on a number of occasions, but I am not aware of any other body in this country doing likewise. It is particularly sad that we have no evidence that the present Government have done anything in seeking this particular concession. The Government do not seem to be aware of the special opportunity created by the major shortfall in the number of eligible applicants for the amnesty. We in this party by this motion now call on this Government immediately to take advantage of this opportunity, even at this very late stage, and to formally request the US congressional leaders, particularly that group known as The Friends of Ireland, actively and sympathetically to consider an extension, especially in the light of the fact that there will be fewer problems resulting from the two million fewer seeking the amnesty than the commission report suggested.

Our motion also calls on the Government to establish support and advice centres in the major cities where you find most of the young immigrant Irish. This is absolutely urgent, given their fears, the dearth of information on any legal rights they may have, exploitation by unscrupulous employers — and there are plenty of those — and health care etc. The typical problem and fear experienced by the illegal Irish immigrant is the problem and fear in the workplace because he or she is undocumented. They must accept working conditions imposed upon them. Some of them are exploited, almost blackmailed, by unscrupulous employers. Many work long and unsocial hours and for rates far less than those rates available to documented or legal aliens. There is no social insurance to cushion them in the event of losing their job, or in the event of illness or an accident at work.

I have known instances of young immigrants having fallen ill who were afraid to go into hospital because they would have to identify themselves and, as a result of improper and inadequate treatment, had to return home very seriously ill. They have the awful feeling of insecurity about the money they earn, where to keep it since they cannot open bank accounts without a Green Card. Even the cashing of their pay cheques present a problem. Since they cannot use the banking system, they are forced to cash their wages in bars or in establishments where alcoholic drink or perhaps worse is served. This draws many young, vulnerable people into an atmosphere or a milieu that is most undesirable. There is a pressure on them, because they feel under a compliment for having their wages cheque cashed, to be drawn into the drink culture. There is also the ordinary temptation to imbibe to excess purely because of the necessity to have that most essential service of having their cheque changed into hard cash, which is what keeps their bodies and souls together. The greatest fear of all is the omnipresent apprehension of deportation, the knock on the door to reveal the visit of the immigration official, or the approach of a stranger to the workplace who turns out to be an investigating officer from the US Naturalisation and Immigration Department. Those fears are all the more heightened and all the more real now with the coming into effect on 1 June next of all the quotas contained in the Immigration Reform and Control Act, 1986, This is the legislation.

Mr. F. Fahey

That should have been done last year.

Mr. Connor

I suggest that the Minister should get a facts sheet on this, and he will find that it takes full effect as and from 1 June 1988. This is the legislation which has the sections governing the full registration of all employees who must have legal status to work in the United States.

This year should have presented us with our greatest opportunity to help our people in America. It is an election year but it looks now as if we may have thrown away the opportunity. The visits of our own Government Ministers to the US have borne few results and one visit, that of the Minister of State at the Department of Education was a disastrous comedy, a foot in the mouth blunder of errors if I may say so too.

Mr. McKenna

That is grossly untrue.

Mr. Connor

We have failed to mobilise Irish American opinion to wield its very effective political clout in favour of the illegals. By and large the huge Irish American voice in the US remains uninvolved in the legislative initiatives of Senator Kennedy, Senator Simpson and Senator Damato or Congressmen Brian Donnelly and Joseph Kennedy. It was Deputy Barry, as Minister for Foreign Affairs who used his good standing——

Mr. McKenna

On a point of order, the Senator should withdraw the remark he made.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

The Senator has raised a point of order and he suggested that you should withdraw the remark.

Mr. Connor

Since the remark is a true statement, I fail to see why I should have to withdraw it.

Mr. McKenna

It is not a true statement. He cast a slight on the Minister. He said that his visit was a comedy of errors and blunders and I think that is a very unfair comment and not worthy of a Member of this House.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

It could be described as parliamentary language.

Mr. Connor

Most parliamentary.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

The Senator has one minute remaining to conclude his remarks.

Mr. Connor

It was Deputy Barry, as Minister for Foreign Affairs, who used his good standing with the Irish-American politicians on Capitol Hill to bring about the only tangible help — the Kennedy-Donnelly Bill. Granted the uncertainty given the long delay in knowing who would be the Democratic candidate for the Presidency did not help, but that alone did not stand in the way of greater effort to help this lost generation, for a lost generation to this country they are. The greater part of this generation now abroad might never have felt the need to leave if ten years ago we had taken courageous political steps to prepare this economy to absorb them in gainful employment at home, instead of looking to the short term at the time. The Government did the opposite by bribing the electorate with their own money and colossal sums of borrowed money, borrowed in their own name, resulting in the creation of a totally dislocated economy devoid of any career opportunity for the present generation of job seekers and resulting in mass emigration.

Politics and the way it regulates and influences opportunity in the economy has failed these young people at home and they feel extremely bitter about that. Now they rightly feel they are being let down again by the failure of this Government to make any outreach to help them abroad.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

The Senator's time is up.

Mr. Connor

I just have a couple of paragraphs left and I beg your indulgence, Sir, that I might be allowed to complete them.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

You have had 30 minutes and the Chair would be obliged if you would finish in one sentence.

Mr. Connor

I had 30 minutes with interruptions. They watch as time runs out on the legislative process in the US Congress, on the amnesty extension in which they had great hope. Yet the Government, as far as they can see, have made no effort to influence progress on this all-important point.

An Cathaoirleach

Your time is up. You have had 30 minutes.

Mr. Connor

With interruptions. I have two more further sentences to say and I would have long since said them if I had not been interrupted.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

The Chair is in an impossible position and the time is up. The Chair would appreciate it if the Senator concluded.

Mr. Connor

I do not agree with your ruling but I must obey it.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

The Chair tries to be impartial. Is the motion seconded?

Mr. Bradford

I second the motion. Since it has been so comprehensively covered by Senator Connor in his usual persuasive and gentle fashion, there is very little for me to add. However, I think it is appropriate that we discuss this motion again tonight. I recall that it was approximately a year ago that we did likewise on the motion of some Fianna Fáil Senators. At that time they called on the newly elected Government to take appropriate and presumably immediate action to help to alleviate the situation of the undocumented Irish in the United States. We have to admit that what has happened since has been little and disappointing.

We referred to a group of people sometimes called the undocumented persons, sometimes called the unextended, sometimes called the out of status or, in other words, illegal aliens. Their numbers are hard to clarify. As Senator Connor stated, we are speaking in the main about the people who emigrated to the United States between the years 1982 and 1987 because those are the people at present most severely hit and those are the people whom no present legislation seems certain to cater for. They are amongst a lost generation, but that lost generation is part of the grouping we so often refer to as our greatest natural resource and our greatest natural asset. These highly qualified, highly educated young people unfortunately find themselves, through no fault of their own but through the fault of Irish politicians not just today or yesterday but down through the years, having to seek not their fame and fortune but their simple livelihood abroad. Our failure to provide them with an adequate living here on this island makes it all the more important for us to ensure that their present status and their present livelihood are made as comfortable and as safe as possible.

It is ironic that it is the United Stated we are discussing tonight when we are discussing the difficulties of Irish emigrants abroad, because no country has benefited more from Irish immigrants than the United States. No country has been built up more from its very roots than the United States has been by Irish immigrants. The signs outside many businesses in the United States a century ago read: "Help wanted; no Irish need apply". That attitude changed. Many Irish people became prominent in business, prominent in the labour movement, prominent in politics, and they went on to develop and have a huge influence on that nation. I do not think we can expect any favours from the United States because of our history down through the years, good as it is. Obviously there are many other ethnic groups throughout the United States who feel that they have an equal right to special attention as of now.

The people of whom we are speaking now, are earning an honest living in the United States at present. They are not taking anything out of the economy. They are not living on social welfare. They are not net beneficiaries of any United States Government funds. Instead they are net contributors to the United States economy. They are wanted out there by the employers who are employing them. They are contributing further to the building of the United States. It is sad and ironic that these people who are actually wanted by their employers to further build and enhance the economy of the United States are being pressurised and almost frightened into returning home.

It is difficult to know the numbers we speak of. They vary from 100,000 to 120,000 to 150,000 people. We have to make this group a priority as of now. There has been much lip-service paid to them, not just at home but also abroad. We can quote various speeches by politicians in Opposition not just over the past year but over the past number of years. It is amazing how something which seems so solvable from the Opposition benches becomes very much unsolvable once you take the reins of power.

Another group with a major role to play and in whom I am very disappointed are the Irish-American politicians. We always tend to judge United States politicians on their greenness. The greener they are in relation to matters northern, matters sometimes not even concerning us, the greater we think they are. I submit that they should be judged by what they do on the ground in situations such as this. Admittedly, some of them are trying at present to push forward legislation such as the Bills mentioned by Senator Connor. Unfortunately, there has still been no major effort made to deal with this major group of immigrants, the post-1982 pre-1987 grouping whom none of the legislation covers. It would be far better for the Irish American politicians to seek to help this country by providing adequate legislation to extend visa and working rights to the Irish in America than to comment as freely as they do on internal Irish affairs.

Senator Connor referred to the problems being faced at present by the Irish immigrants in relation to their welfare rights and their health rights, etc. That is something which is very well documented. We have all heard some very chilling examples not only of what can happen but what is happening at present. Another angle has been raised recently. It is a very serious one which again illustrates clearly the need for immediate Government action, that is, the situations which have arisen recently as a result of Irish people in medical difficulty being afforded so-called help and assistance by the Nor-Aid Group and other associated groups. These people come along with their so-called charities. They pay the bills today but their influence tomorrow and the day after on these Irish immigrants whom they purport to help could be very damaging and is certainly doing this country no great favour. It is a great pity if we have to depend on groups like Nor-Aid to provide aid and assistance to our emigrants abroad. I am not saying there is a total lack of action, but the lack of adequate action is resulting in this happening at present and it is a very dangerous scenario which is emerging.

Senator Connor also referred to the problems being faced by the Irish immigrants in banking their money. That might not seem too grave a problem to some, and others would see it just as a reflection of how well the Irish are supposed to be doing economically. However, it is a matter of fact that illegal immigrants cannot open bank accounts and it has been and is giving rise to all the problems which Senator Connor raised.

We have, as Senator Connor mentioned, the undesirable situation of people keeping their money at home. This is indeed becoming quite obvious to the more criminal elements running on the verge of these groupings who can then take advantage of it. Senator Connor also mentioned the fact of cheques being cashed in pubs only and mentioned the undesirable effects of that. He also mentioned drink and things far worse, what things I would not know. Presumably Senator Connor may be able to clarify that.

Mr. Connor

Take an educated guess.

Mr. Bradford

We should also begin to approach this problem at European level. This country is not the only country which is facing a problem with illegal immigrants in America at the moment. It applies to many countries throughout Europe. All of them do not have the same unemployment or emigration problem that we have, but many of them have a problem at the moment with illegal immigrants in the United States. As a member state of the European Community we should try to ensure that the whole problem of illegal emigrants to the United States from Europe is taken up at central level and a solution found at that level. The Bills at present going through the US Congress take into account the European situation and allow different quota levels for European countries. It is time that a more concerted effort was made at EC level to bring about a solution to this problem.

Part of our motion relates to the setting up of advice centres in New York, Boston, Chicago, Philadelphia, San Francisco and other such centres throughout the United States, and part of it also seeks support similar to that supplied by the Department of Labour to Irish immigrants in the United Kingdom. Presumably these two parts of the motion would run hand in hand. We are told that the numbers emigrating from this country last year were close on 30,000. If those 30,000 were at home at present, presumably most of them would be faced with a future, in the short term at least, on the dole. You do not have to be a great economist to know that would be costing this State at least £30 million per annum. I do not think it is too much to ask any Government to invest some of that saving to ensure that those unfortunate people who have no choice but to leave our shores are able to get advice and help where necessary in the United States.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

The Senator has one minute remaining.

Mr. Bradford

The centres work very well indeed in the United Kingdom. If anything you could say they are so successful that they are under-staffed and even more of them are necessary. There is no doubt that there is a grave need at present for these centres in the United States. The setting up of such centres would help to alleviate many of the smaller problems being faced by Irish immigrants. It would help alleviate much of the unnecessary fear in the minds of Irish immigrants abroad at present.

I will conclude my comments at that. This motion is slightly more political, I suppose, than the motion which was on the Clár a year ago, but we have to reflect on the fact that the Government have been a year in office and a lot of talk has taken place with regard to the whole issue. We have to recall the promises made by the present Taoiseach before the last election when he stated that his party intended to use every diplomatic and political means available to secure legal status for these young people abroad. He will claim that he has been doing this but, unfortunately, he has not been successful. If what we have seen up to now is the best effort he can manage, I am afraid it is not good enough. We have young people out there looking to us for help and support. I wonder what would happen if they could cast their votes in the next general election. They are out of sight and out of mind. We must speak up for them and I appeal to Members to support our motion and hopefully it might stir the Government into some action at last.

Mr. D. Kiely

I welcome the opportunity to speak on this motion. I have listened to both Senators. You would think they were living in the United States all their lives, they have such a fierce grasp of it. I can speak with a lot of authority because I happen to have lived as an immigrant in the United States for ten years. You would think, listening to both Sentors, that the immigration problem and the fact that many people are living illegally in the United States are due to the economic failures of the Government. It is amazing that they seem to forget that all of this happened between the years 1982 and 1987 when there was mass emigration, mass borrowings and a doubling of the national debt.

If the Opposition, in Government at the time, would be good enough to admit that, this would be a very constructive debate. We are men enough and our Government are good enough to recognise that there is a problem out there. We have recognised that there is a problem out there and we have helped. I would like the remark made by Senator Bradford that the Taoiseach was ignoring these young people to be withdrawn and also the remark made about the Minister, Deputy Fahey. It is a wonder that nobody said something about our Minister for Foreign Affairs because since we took power we have a full time Assistant Consul General in the United States working full time on the immigration problem. That has only happened in the past 12 months.

I had the honour recently of being in the United States and visiting centres in Boston, Chicago, Washington, New York and other various centres. I met with all these groups, including the Immigration Reform Movement and the Ancient Order of Hibernians. I met with Senator Brian Donnelly, Senator Joe Kennedy, Congressman Mockler, the Speaker of the House Jim Wright. To say that this Government have been doing nothing whatsoever to help this new legislation that has now gone through the Senate and which we hope will get through the House of Representatives by the end of this year is totally ludicrous.

I am delighted that the Opposition gave us the opportunity to debate this very important issue here tonight. During my recent visit to Washington I met with a number of Congressmen and Senators. I was there on 15 March when the Bill went through the Senate. There are many good items in that Bill which are badly needed because I know several families from my constituency who had to wait as long as eight years to claim a direct relative, like a brother and sister, in the United States. I have three of my family in the United States at the moment legally and one who is illegal. It will take me or my wife approximately 18 months to two years to get legal status for that child even though that child is one of ours. My wife is a legal American resident but still, under the present legislation, it now takes almost two years to legalise a child and up to eight years for a brother or sister.

This new legislation that has gone through the Senate would enable an extra 100,000 people to be added on to that quota and it would bring the waiting period down from eight years to approximately one year for a brother or sister and from one year to about eight or 12 weeks for a son or daughter. I was disappointed that, with the many friends we have in the United States in very high positions, for example, Supreme Court and District Court Justices and people in high places with political power that the Government have done nothing to try to have legislation introduced. Brian Donnelly brought in the legislation we all know as the Donnelly Bill and thousands of young Irish people came in the back door and got legal status in the United States. That legislation was introduced to benefit the Mexicans and not the Irish. Thank God, the politicians in the United States were smart enough to make sure they dovetailed us into that, and we are still working with the Donnelly Bill. Brian Donnelly is to be complimented on what he has done to date for those Irish.

As well as that we have the Amnesty Bill relating to those who emigrated prior to 1982. I was disappointed at the number of people who came forward to get amnesty under that legislation. They were, of course, afraid that since they were working in the States illegally they would be used as scapegoats. Then various organisations in the United States, with the help of the Government and the Consuls General in New York, Washington and all the larger centres, asked those people to come forward for help and assistance. Not alone did they do that, but Catholic charities have organised another grouping within the United States to give free legal aid to document those people. That is done by the present Irish Government, through the Taoiseach and the Minister for Foreign Affairs.

There was a problem two or three years ago with young people being maimed, hurt and even killed in the United States. I had several brought back to my own constituency in boxes. No help whatsoever was given to our young people except by the county associations to which they belonged. Because of representations by our Taoiseach and our Department of Foreign Affairs, people can now get free legal aid in New York city, in Chicago and in Boston. If they become seriously ill, help from the Consul is there. While I was in New York recently I called to see the Consul and there were four problems in one day, two that I brought to the notice of the Consul. Within that very short period four young people were helped. They got guidance and recognition and were told exactly what to do and where to go for help. To come in here to the Seanad to try to cut down those young people who are in need of our help at the moment is a scandal.

Mr. Connor

On a point of order, there was no effort whatsoever to denigrate——

An Cathaoirleach

Deputy Kiely to continue without interruption.

Mr. Connor

I am allowed under Standing Orders to make a point of order and Senator Kiely has inferred from something I or Senator Bradford said that we in some way denigrated the young people in the United States. We did not.

Mr. D. Kiely

Irreparable damage was done to those young people in the first three quarters of an hour of this debate this evening. How can anybody accuse this Government of not being there to help them when the documentary evidence is there in front of everybody? What we should be doing now as politicians is to unite for once on this issue. We might differ on economic issues etc., but this is so serious. I am delighted that it is being debated. We should be at one on this issue and try to help those people to be documented. We should be using all our resources, all our connections, to make sure that the Congressmen in the United States get this crucial Bill into Committee Stage because it cannot be taken on the floor of the House of Representatives until it is at Committee Stage.

I am hopeful that we will get that legislation through and that we have enough friends in Congress. I am convinced that, with the likes of Brian Donnelly, Joe Kennedy and others, we have enough people to get this legislation through to give recognition, for the first time since 1965, to 50,000 people from this country who have no relatives in the United States and to give them the chance and the opportunity to use their skills and talents abroad and possibly bring them back here some few years later to set up industry here. It is something we should be encouraging. I am not encouraging emigration one way or the other but I would like to see those people documented.

There was also mention by one of the Senators over there of the amnesty relating to emigration between 1982 and 1987. I agree with them that there should be an amnesty because they were the years when there was mass emigration out of this country and the Coalition Government completely ignored it and said it was not happening at all.

Mr. Connor

Not true.

Mr. D. Kiely

At least we had the courage of our convictions. We admitted that it was happening and now we are trying to right it, just like all the other things that went wrong in this country in that same period. You have to stand up and be counted in these situations. Congressman Joe Kennedy has another Bill drafted looking for an amnesty for those people who immigrated between 1982 and 1987. The Donnelly/Simpson/Kennedy Bill is the one that is most important to us at the moment and we should be using all resources in that regard. The people in the Opposition benches should be helping the Government if they have any friends in Congress in the United States, and I do not think they have many left from the remarks they made.

Mr. Connor

We are the only ones who are doing anything.

Mr. D. Kiely

They should be using any influence they have to assist the Government in what they are doing. I would like once again to congratulate the Taoiseach on his recent visit to the United States to meet that group of people in New York City and Boston. I was delighted to be able to report to him my findings in the three or four weeks which I spent there. It is good that the Government are able to recognise those problems and that they are tackling them. As I stated in my few brief words, we made the moves and now we will have to make sure that the legislation will go through. For the sake of all the young people in the United States, I appeal to the people on the Opposition benches to, for goodness sake, speak with some hope of help, not destruction, for our young people in the United States.

Professor Murphy

It is all too obvious from this party bickering that is going on in the course of this debate that all the Senators who have spoken up to now realise in their hearts and souls that we are dealing here with a problem which is a reproach to the whole political establishment of this State since its foundation. What we have here is the politics of guilt expressing themselves.

Like Senator Bradford I recall the motion we discussed which was moved by Senator Paschal Mooney in June last, nearly ten months ago. I said things then which I have been reading recently which I would find very hard to express better than I expressed them at that time. Having been in the United States twice since then, though I cannot pretend to have the experience Senator Kiely has had. I am more than ever convinced that what I said on that occasion is absolutely valid today.

I support the motion. If this country cannot give employment to our young people, it is our responsibility to promote their welfare where they have to go. They are a grave embarrassment to us and by us I mean not one party or the other but everybody responsible for running this country's affairs since independence. It is an embarrassment that goes very deeply into our historical subconscious because it was one of the assumptions of our nationalist philosophers, in the century before independence, that independence would solve, among other things, the curse of emigration, that all you had to do was to establish a native Government and the thing was solved. Well we know better now.

When Éamon de Valera proudly boasted in 1933 that our children, like our cattle, would no longer be brought up for export, it was a golden promise that perished very quickly on his lips. He went on to preside over the massive haemorrhage that characterised native Government under his rule and that of his party and that characterised the whole period since independence, apart from a few years in the sixties and early seventies.

The unpalatable fact we have to face is that emigration is the norm in this country's historical experience. It is a dominant feature of the Irish national personality since well before the Famine. It is a historical fallacy to think that all this began with the great Famine. Exodus began long before then. Over a century and a half one could say that the periods when there was no or little emigration were very few and far between and these periods significantly generally spelt trouble in this country. Perhaps that is why, despite all the hand wringing and all the rhetoric, our Government are in their hearts and souls secretly not totally displeased that emigration is a safety valve.

There is some evidence from researchers in Government archives that Governments look on emigration as an integral component of policy, of planning or what passes for policy in planning. There is a deep cynicism about this, and only someone with the incorruptible innocence of our present Minister for Foreign Affairs speaks the truth from time to time and suggests that our young people will have to accept this as a fact of life. It is inevitable in the kind of ramshackle mix of an economy we have had since 1922. It would be the same under Fine Gael and it would be the same under the Progressive Democrats.

Only if we use the resources of this country properly, systematically and ruthlessly in the public interest, will we change that dismal picture and, even then, if we had full employment, which presumably is the answer to emigration, what would be involved is that people who now enjoy a high standard of living would have to lower their expectations very drastically. That is the fundamental domestic fact whether we like it or not. That is the background to this motion.

Turning to the motion, it does not recognise certain unpalatable realities about the situation in the United States. What is in the favour of our young people who have to emigrate to the United States is the fact that they are white, that they are English speaking, that they are well educated. At first glance that would seem to be a great factor in their favour. We frequently trumpet the merits of these alleged benefits. These very qualities are what makes them a subject of envy to young Americans. They are in competition with the flower of America because they are white, English speaking, and well educated. In many areas they are in competition with Americans. The real problem for America in terms of the immigration problem is not the Irish, not the Europeans, because the age of Irish emigration and the age of European emigration are over.

What is now the great problem is the uncontrollable and massive influx from Latin America, Mexico, the Philippines and Asia — though to a lesser extent because the Asians are not a problem but an enormous resource for Americans. As for the others, the Mexicans, the Hispanics and so on, they are the wretched refuse of the new teeming shores. They are the huddled masses yearning to be free. They are the Irish of the 20th century. If there is a grand and generous American tradition of welcoming the wretched of the earth to their shores, they are the people who are the real pity and they are the people who inspire pity from the most noble hearted Americans of our time. Let us stop this talk about what we gave to America and how much they owe us. They owe us nothing. We have got our whack and America has done extremely well by the Irish, so there is no point in pleading that they owe us a historical debt because that debt has been paid.

We have to remember that the people we are talking about, the Congressmen on Capitol Hill have no longer the political clout they had, that is to say, the Irish American politicians who are presumably the people referred to in subsection (1) of the motion are not as powerful any more. It is doubtful that they ever cared that much about us apart from St. Patrick's day sentimentalities, apart from when it suited them domestically, when they were amenable to pressure from Irish Americans in their constituencies, but these constituencies are now disintegrating. The inner cities are now becoming the preserves of the new emigrants and the new poor, so that the Kennedys and the Donnellys, and so on, do not matter anymore — not to the extent they did matter anyway. Even if we are to approach the topic on this cynical basis, I doubt that the welfare of the Irish emigrants matters to them at election time.

There is another interesting factor in this situation. Our young illegal emigrants are by no means universally pitied and sympathised with by the older generation of the Irish in America, even by the Irish emigrants of the fifties who look upon these new narrowbacks — to use a traditional way of looking at the more recent emigration wave — as people who are having it fairly easy and who did not have the tough times they had. This is regrettable. This may be selfish, but it is a fact of life. There is no great pity going for them among the more senior generation of Irish emigrants. That is another reason the politics of Irish emigration are no longer central to Irish American concerns.

Suppose we adopted what has been suggested recently — which at first sight seems an intriguing idea — and applied the same technique to our American cousins as we are applying to the people we know in Britain, the "Write and Invite" approach, that we should write to people in America and say, "Pressurise your local congressman in order to do the best we can for our local emigrants", there is no guarantee that that will work for the reason I mentioned because the people we write to may not be very sympathetic to these young people and because we have grossly exaggerated the number of "Irish" in America. These are the harsh facts. It is very sad that we have to say them.

The only ultimate salvation, if we are to have a future in Ireland, is to drastically recast our whole ideas about the economy and society. In the meantime I support this motion and I wish it well. If there is anything I can do through my own American contacts I will be glad to help these young people, but no purpose will be served by the pretence that one party or the other are responsible for this sad state since we are all responsible for it.

Mr. Mullooly

I am absolutely satisfied that the primary concern of the Senators who drafted this motion was not to help the people to whom the motion refers, namely, the Irish out of status immigrants in the United States. This motion is nothing more than a feeble and cynical attempt to embarrass the Government.

Mr. Connor

Unworthy.

Mr. Mullooly

This is blatantly obvious from the intemperate and extravagant language which is used in the first line of the motion. To refer to the approach adopted by the present Government as "ineffective and uncaring" is as divisive and as provocative as it is untrue. That is not the kind of language which will facilitate consensus. It is not the kind of language which would be used by someone who was genuinely interested in assisting these young people, or in finding solutions to their problems. If the Senators who drafted this motion had any real or genuine interest in the plight of our out of status young immigrants, they would have drafted a motion which would receive the unanimous backing and support of every Member of this House, irrespective of party affiliation. Instead, they chose to engage in a cynical coat trailing exercise. They deliberately decided to make a political football out of these young people and out of the situation in which these young people find themselves.

Mr. Connor

Rubbish.

Mr. Mullooly

This attempt to achieve some kind of political advantage on the backs of these young people is without doubt the most disgraceful piece of political opportunism I have witnessed in my seven years as a Member of this House. If we really want to help these young emigrants we should stick to the facts which are there for all to see.

Referring to emigration the Fianna Fáil programme, which was issued prior to the last general election, stated:

Fianna Fáil are greatly concerned over the plight of many thousands of young Irish people who have been forced to emigrate over the past four years. Special problems have arisen in the United States where the status and general uncertainty of their position prevents them from making definite plans for the future and where they are often exposed to exploitation in their employment. This is a cause of great anxiety not only to those directly involved but also to their families here at home. Fianna Fáil would therefore undertake a major political and diplomatic initiative to secure legal status for these young people.

Contrary to the implication in this motion Fianna Fáil in Government have undertaken such an initiative. Over the past year the Taoiseach, the Tánaiste and various Government Ministers and Ministers of State have visited the United States. The Taoiseach has visited the United States on two occasions in that period. All of them have availed of every opportunity presented by these visits to raise the plight of our out of status young emigrants and the special difficulties they face, particularly as a result of the Immigration Reform and Control Act, 1986. These problems have been discussed with a variety of congressional and administration leaders in addition to having been discussed by the Taoiseach with President Reagan. I am satisfied that a genuine and concerted effort is being made by the Government, on an ongoing basis, to bring about a situation which will enable the legal position of these young Irish citizens to be regularised.

I am also satisfied that considerable progress has been made and is being made in regard to this. I would like to be associated with the many tributes which have been paid to those members of both Houses of Congress in the United States who are doing everything that is humanly and politically possible to ensure that a situation is brought about which will enable those of our citizens who wish to live and work legally in that country to do so. The Kennedy-Simpson Bill, which has already been referred to, has been passed by the Senate. A similar Bill, sponsored by Congressman Donnelly and Congressman Schumer, is currently before the United States House of Representatives. This Bill provides for substantial revisions in the immigrant selection system. The very considerable number of additional visas, which the Bill proposes to make available for non preference aliens, will be distributed on the basis of a new points system which will favour emigrants from Ireland.

It has been suggested in recent newspaper reports in this country that the Bill is meeting some opposition from the influential Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, Congressman Peter Rudino of New Jersey. I would go along with the suggestion that people in this country who have relatives or friends in New Jersey should ask them to contact Congressman Rudino and seek his support for the measure. I understand that the reservations which Congressman Rudino had about the Bill were because he perceived its provisions to be discriminatory in favour of certain ethnic groups. The other side of the coin, so far as Ireland is concerned, is that the Bill will be doing nothing more than redressing, to some extent, the situation which resulted from the 1965 legislation.

It is of vital importance to Ireland that this Bill should become law. It was suggested to me, when I visited the United States recently, that a high profile lobby in support of the Bill could be, and probably would be, counter-productive. If the Bill is perceived to be a measure which is designed to give a particular advantage to the Irish, there is a distinct danger. It is certain that other ethnic groups will seek to mobilise opposition to it. Consequently the lobby in support of the Bill has to be discreet and has to be on the basis of the greater degree of fairness and equity which it will bring to the immigration system. It is on this basis that its sponsors are promoting the Bill. In a letter to their congressional colleagues dated 11 February 1988 Senators Kennedy and Simpson stated:

From the outset it has been our goal to reform the immigration system so that it more faithfully serves the national interest, so that it is more flexible, and so that it is open to immigrants from nations who are shortchanged by the current law.

That letter, which outlines the provisions of the Bill and the revisions which are being proposed concludes with the following paragraph:

The time has come for Congress to pick up where it left off in 1986 and address the unfinished agenda of immigration — the reform of our legal immigration system. The bill is a balanced attempt to serve the national interest; it preserves the immigration rights of those who have close family connections in this country; it stimulates immigration from the earlier sources of immigration to our country that have contributed so much to America in the past; and it promotes the entry of those who are selected specifically for their ability to contribute their needed skills and talents to the development of our country. This reform will both continue and strengthen one of the oldest and most enduring themes in our nation's history — America's immigrant heritage.

It is of vital importance to very many Irish citizens that this legislation is enacted as soon as possible. In this regard I believe that great credit is due to the Taoiseach and the Government for the progress that has been made to date. I am confident that the Bill will be enacted before the end of the year.

The staff of the Irish Embassy in Washington and the staff of all the Irish consulates in the United States also deserve to be commended for their role in helping to bring about this situation. I am satisfied that they are also a source of very valuable assistance and advice for our young undocumented Irish emigrants in the United States. During my recent visit I had the privilege of visiting both the Embassy in Washington and the Irish Consulate in New York. I was most impressed by the very genuine concern for these young people which was expressed to me by both Ambassador McKernan and Consul General Ó Ceallaigh. I am absolutely satisfied that no stone is left unturned by either when it comes to providing advice and support for our young emigrants who may seek their help.

Speaking at a function in New York during his recent visit to the United States the Taoiseach stated:

The Irish Embassy in Washington and all our Consulates in the United States have explicit instructions to give this problem their full attention. We have augmented our staff at our Consulate in New York and appointed an officer there to work full time in providing assistance and advice to our young people.

This statement clearly gives the lie to the implication in the motion that support and advice are not being provided at present.

I would also like to pay tribute to the various county associations and to the very many Irish American societies and organisations and individuals who are also helping and supporting these young people. I was delighted to have been able to accept an invitation to a meeting in Washington of one such group during the visit to which I referred. The group in question is known as the Irish Emigration Support Committee of the Washington DC Metropolitan Area. This group is doing excellent work in assisting and advising new Irish emigrants in the greater Washington area and also in lobbying support for the proposed new immigration legislation. This group is fortunate to have as its Chairman Mr. Pat Troy who also hosts a weekly radio programme in the Washington area and who is, therefore, in a position to make the work of the group, and the assistance which its members can provide, widely known in that part of the United States. Such groups have a wide range of expertise available to them. This group is in a position to provide invaluable assistance in relation to the wide variety of problems which can arise.

The motion in subsection 3 asks the Government to supply support for Irish emigrants in the United States similar to that supplied by the Department of Labour to Irish emigrants in the United Kingdom. I am sure the Government have looked at this. I do not know how feasible this would be but certainly the Department of Labour are doing an excellent job in providing a pre-departure advisory service for persons who are contemplating seeking work abroad by helping them to make informed decisions and also by assisting them in relation to information on the conditions obtaining in the countries to which they may be emigrating. I am sure that, if it is feasible to implement that suggestion, the Government would be very willing to do so.

In conclusion, I would like to say that the real task facing this country is not to deal with the emigration situation by providing support services for our emigrants. The real task is to create the employment opportunities here at home which will ensure that no young Irish person will be compelled to emigrate to find a job. For the first time in many years, we have a Government who are working towards this objective in the only realistic way possible. I certainly hope their efforts will be successful.

An Cathaoirleach

Senator O'Toole is circulating his speech.

Mr. J. O'Toole

Thank you very much. I felt that it was proper to uphold the dignity of the House and that one should be well prepared in a situation like this. You will recognise this is my all purposes script.

(Interruptions.)

An Cathaoirleach

Senator O'Toole to continue without interruption.

Mr. J. O'Toole

I would like to welcome the Minister of State with responsibility for youth and sport. The man looks as if he has an amount of time on his hands with most of his area of responsibility wasting itself across the Irish Sea and the Atlantic. I congratulate him on the brave words he spoke last term when many of us shouted "hear, hear" and agreed with him. I want to indicate to the Minister regarding his comments on Irish American politicians that he had many supporters on this side of this House. In the Irish society at present the concept of emigration and the concept of youth unemployment have become almost institutionalised with a range and variety of support services. It has almost reached a stage now where youth unemployment has become a law unto itself. It is surviving on its own internal synergy because unemployment has almost become an energy in Ireland. If we were to wipe out youth unemployment tomorrow morning, there would be many people out of work in the support services and industries.

The Minister is presiding over a young population who, in their growing and formative years, are threatened by the prospect of unemployment and stunned into passivity and acceptance, a generation who are now beginning to forget how to question and demand what is right for young people. We are looking at a generation of young people who are being exploited in hamburger joints, back street operations and who are part of the black economy in many places at the level of £1 or £2 an hour. Many studies have emphasised that point.

The latest census figures, as outlined in the preliminary report of the Central Statistics Office, are frightening. We see that the projections and demographic trends which were spoken about and put in front of us for the past number of years are all turning out to be true. Since 1981 the annual rate of emigration has moved from 10,000 per year to 31,000 or more per year in 1986. I want to put those 30,000 a year in some kind of context. It is easy to say that the figure is massive, and disgraceful and that it shows an uncontrolled rise of 300 per cent in half a decade. The vast majority of these are young people. Regrettably we are now also looking at a totally new concept, new in modern terms of family emigration. This is a complete turn around from ten years ago when we were inviting people back and when we had family immigration. We are now back to the position where we have got family emigration again.

The young people who are leaving the country are out greatest national natural resource. How often do we hear that? It is the chant of politicians. It is the chant of the political parties. I want to put in context what 31,000 people leaving Ireland per year means. In very simple terms there are roughly 60,000 births per year in Ireland. If there are now 30,000 or more leaving the country that is one out of every two young people at present. An examination of the spin-off and cumulative effects of that is very frightening.

The people who are leaving fall into different categories. There are certain people who, by virtue of their privileged background, or by virtue of the fact that they have been able to survive and exploit the educational system, can get themselves qualified in areas where there are jobs available and who will remain in this country. There are the very bright, innovative, decision-making calibre people who leave because they see no future in this country. Left behind are those people who do not have the courage, qualifications, or the sense of adventure to leave and start up elsewhere. In many ways it is a sad way to describe people. The people who are leaving are the people we most need to develop this country in the way we would like to see it developing in the future.

It is a distressing forecast but the fact is that we are now well on the way to seeing half of every generation of our young people lost to emigration as long as this trend continues. I have not even adverted to the fact that this figure of 30,000 is a conservative figure. The latest figure I saw was 35,000 per year. Does the Minister accept my concern for the young people or is he querying the figures? He can take them up with the Central Statistics Office. The figures are coming down because there are more families leaving the country. There are fewer children being born. That is the only reason. If the Minister says they are going down, to what figure are they going down? Is it 25,000, 26,000, 27,000 or 29,000? It is somewhere between 25,000 and 30,000. There is no survey, trend or forecast which has shown less than that and, either way, it is half a generation. They are dispensable. They will go on the next boat if they do not go on the first boat.

(Interruptions.)

Mr. J. O'Toole

It is interesting that my colleague, Senator Murphy, referred to one of the founding fathers of the Minister's party who said that when we became independent we would export cattle rather than young people. Now we have stopped exporting cattle because, since we joined the European Community, the national herd has been halved and we have doubled the export of young people. That is the direction in which we are going. Apart from the environmental damage, what would be the response if the Kinsale oil or gas field were going to waste? Can you imagine——

(Interruptions.)

Mr. J. O'Toole

If our natural resources, in terms of material resources, were leaving the country there would be cries of outrage. People would not accept it.

Mr. F. Fahey

That has happened with every Government.

Mr. J. O'Toole

It is clear that the private sector has failed to provide adequately in this area. It is clear that the private sector are losing more jobs than they are creating despite the fact that we had 720 new jobs last year. Relying on the private sector has been a disaster. In our new drive to create employment for young people and to stop emigration, our motivation must be the public good and not private gain. I will be pleased to continue in the same vein with a brand new script for perusal by Senators next week.

Debate adjourned.

An Cathaoirleach

When is it proposed to sit again?

Mr. R. Kiely

At 10.30 a.m. tomorrow.